Turkish rule in Bulgaria

The Bulgars have only just regained their liberty after a servitude of centuries. I have already expressed my opinion that Turkish rule in Bulgaria was by no means so cruel or so oppressive as it is represented to have been by ardent partisans of Sclav proclivities. Still, after making every possible allowance, the rule of Turkey in Bulgaria was an autocratic despotism exercised by master’s alien from their subjects in race, language, and religion. Slavery is slavery all the world over; and till within recent years the Bulgars were slaves, who only enjoyed a modicum of freedom, thanks to the remoteness of their country, the absence of individual wealth, and the contemptuous indifference of their Moslem lords and masters. The marvel is, given these conditions, that they have retained so much of the virtues of freemen, not that they should have imbibed a few of the vices of slavery. Servility, dishonesty, dissimulation, disregard of truth, and absence of self-respect are failings necessarily generated by slavery. I am quite prepared to admit that the present generation of Bulgarians have not lost all the characteristics inherited from their forefathers. There is not a Bulgarian, over the age of eighteen, who was not born under Turkish rule; and till a year or two ago, there was not a child at school who could not remember the day when the Turk was master in the country. Moreover, the indictments against the Bulgarian character, to which I have made reference, are at best generalizations from individual experiences. Whenever you ask for some definite proof that the Bulgarians are all dishonest and untruthful, you are told of some isolated instances of fraud and deceit which have come within the knowledge of your informants.

Dr. Constantine Jirsech

These instances may or may not be fairly stated, but, in any case, they are not sufficient to justify any general conclusion as to the character of a whole nation. As against these hasty denunciations, it may be well to quote the testimony of three witnesses, who enjoyed considerable opportunities of studying the Bulgarian people. Dr. Constantine Jirsech, who, some years ago, published a very impartial work on Bulgaria in German, gives it as his opinion that ‘‘the Bulgarian is sober in every respect, “careful in his expenditure, and hard-working. The energy 44 he displays as a cultivator and an artisan is inexhaustible. 41 Under the exterior of the peasant, cunning and suspicious “in accordance with peasant nature, the common Bulgar 44 conceals a shrewd and observant mind. Being both docile 44 and conscientious, whether as scholar, soldier, artisan, or 44 trader, he identifies himself completely with the duties he 44 has undertaken to perform. His whole mode of life is 44 simple and frugal.” Again, Prince Joseph of Battenburg, the younger brother of the late Prince Alexander, states that 44 the people of Bulgaria are sober, laborious, and persevering. They possess all the qualities which, when Bulgaria has developed her productive forces, must enable her some day or other to play the leading part with the Balkan Peninsula. Bulgaria is a rich, fertile, happy country, a country with a future.” This opinion, I may say, was expressed by Prince Joseph long after his brother’s connection with the Principality had come to an untimely end. Similar testimony is borne by a recent French traveler, Captain Lamouske: 44 The dominant features in the Bulgarian character are a certain seriousness and a sense of what is practical. As a rule the Bulgarian is cold, reserved, and silent. As a rule, too, he leads a moral life, is hardworking and economical.”